Celeron N4000 vs FX-8320

VS

Aggregate performance score

FX-8320
2012
8 cores / 8 threads, 125 Watt
3.43
+269%
Celeron N4000
2017
2 cores / 2 threads, 6 Watt
0.93

FX-8320 outperforms Celeron N4000 by a whopping 269% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing FX-8320 and Celeron N4000 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking15602529
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentDesktop processorLaptop
Seriesno dataIntel Celeron
Power efficiency2.6014.67
Architecture codenameVishera (2012−2015)Goldmont Plus (2017)
Release date23 October 2012 (12 years ago)11 December 2017 (7 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$107

Detailed specifications

FX-8320 and Celeron N4000 basic parameters such as number of cores, number of threads, base frequency and turbo boost clock, lithography, cache size and multiplier lock state. These parameters indirectly say of CPU speed, though for more precise assessment you have to consider their test results.

Physical cores8 (Octa-Core)2 (Dual-core)
Threads82
Base clock speed3.5 GHz1.1 GHz
Boost clock speed4 GHz2.6 GHz
Multiplierno data11
L1 cacheno data112 KB
L2 cache8192 KB4 MB
L3 cacheno data4 MB
Chip lithography32 nm14 nm
Die size315 mm2no data
Maximum core temperature61 °C105 deg C
Number of transistors1,200 millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-+
Unlocked multiplier+-
P0 Vcore voltageMin: 1.2 V - Max: 1.4 Vno data

Compatibility

Information on FX-8320 and Celeron N4000 compatibility with other computer components: motherboard (look for socket type), power supply unit (look for power consumption) etc. Useful when planning a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. Note that power consumption of some processors can well exceed their nominal TDP, even without overclocking. Some can even double their declared thermals given that the motherboard allows to tune the CPU power parameters.

Number of CPUs in a configuration11 (Uniprocessor)
SocketAM3+FCBGA1090
Power consumption (TDP)125 Watt6 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by FX-8320 and Celeron N4000. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataIntel® SSE4.2
AES-NI++
FMA+-
AVX+-
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+
Speed Shiftno data-
Turbo Boost Technologyno data-
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data-
Idle Statesno data+
Thermal Monitoring-+
Smart Responseno data-
GPIOno data+
Turbo Boost Max 3.0no data-

Security technologies

FX-8320 and Celeron N4000 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

EDBno data+
Secure Keyno data+
MPX-+
Identity Protection-+
SGXno dataYes with Intel® ME
OS Guardno data+
Anti-Theftno data-

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by FX-8320 and Celeron N4000 are enumerated here.

AMD-V+-
VT-dno data+
VT-xno data+
EPTno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by FX-8320 and Celeron N4000. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR4
Maximum memory sizeno data8 GB
Max memory channelsno data2
Maximum memory bandwidthno data38.397 GB/s

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataIntel UHD Graphics 600
Max video memoryno data8 GB
Quick Sync Video-+
Graphics max frequencyno data650 MHz
Execution Unitsno data12

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of FX-8320 and Celeron N4000 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supportedno data3
eDPno data+
DisplayPort-+
HDMI-+
MIPI-DSIno data+

Graphics image quality

Maximum display resolutions supported by FX-8320 and Celeron N4000 integrated GPUs, including resolutions over different interfaces.

4K resolution supportno data+

Graphics API support

APIs supported by FX-8320 and Celeron N4000 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectXno data12
OpenGLno data4.4

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by FX-8320 and Celeron N4000.

PCIe versionn/a2.0
PCI Express lanesno data6
USB revisionno data2.0/3.0
Total number of SATA portsno data2
Max number of SATA 6 Gb/s Portsno data2
Number of USB portsno data8
Integrated LANno data-
UARTno data+

Synthetic benchmark performance

Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance rating. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

FX-8320 3.43
+269%
Celeron N4000 0.93

Passmark

Passmark CPU Mark is a widespread benchmark, consisting of 8 different types of workload, including integer and floating point math, extended instructions, compression, encryption and physics calculation. There is also one separate single-threaded scenario measuring single-core performance.

FX-8320 5445
+270%
Celeron N4000 1472

GeekBench 5 Single-Core

GeekBench 5 Single-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses only a single CPU core.

FX-8320 460
+42%
Celeron N4000 324

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses all available CPU cores.

FX-8320 1812
+243%
Celeron N4000 528

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 3.43 0.93
Recency 23 October 2012 11 December 2017
Physical cores 8 2
Threads 8 2
Chip lithography 32 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 125 Watt 6 Watt

FX-8320 has a 268.8% higher aggregate performance score, and 300% more physical cores and 300% more threads.

Celeron N4000, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 5 years, a 128.6% more advanced lithography process, and 1983.3% lower power consumption.

The FX-8320 is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron N4000 in performance tests.

Note that FX-8320 is a desktop processor while Celeron N4000 is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions on choice between FX-8320 and Celeron N4000, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite CPU.


AMD FX-8320
FX-8320
Intel Celeron N4000
Celeron N4000

Similar processor comparisons

We picked several similar comparisons of processors in the same market segment and performance relatively close to those reviewed on this page.

Community ratings

Here you can see how users rate the processors, as well as rate them yourself.


4.2 1425 votes

Rate FX-8320 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3 941 vote

Rate Celeron N4000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about FX-8320 or Celeron N4000, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.